Burn oil so we can eat more chocolate

Chocolate is produced from the beans that grow on cocoa trees. These plants can only grow in a fairly narrow range of conditions, which makes them vulnerable to changes in the environment.

Unfortunately, climate change is threatening some of these key growing regions. According to the IPCC, rising temperatures and a relative reduction in rainfall could make areas like West Africa less suitable for cocoa production in the future. Changes to the climate are also pushing cocoa-growing regions to higher altitudes in some parts of the world, which can make some crops unsustainable.

We can see just how hard cocoa crops have been hit by record heat and 500 billion tons of carbon.

142 comments to Burn oil so we can eat more chocolate

I’ve been an AGW/climate-change skeptic for a long time in part because it has always seemed to me that a little temperature increase would be a good thing. However, now that AGW/climate-change appears to impact chocolate production, I’ll take another look. For me, a few meters of sea level rise, polar bear extinction, melting glaciers, etc. aren’t a big deal; but if you reduce my supply of chocolate, well now you’ve got my attention and maybe this whole AGW/climate-change thing is important and worth a second look. I’ll get right on it.

Ive always considered climate change to be a deluberate unwinnable ” crisis” ( like cholesterol is set up to be ), so that no matter what you did, it coukd never be solved. Further, it seemed that it never jibed with reality. Thirdly, it reeked of social engineering and fearmongering.

A couple of weeks? That’s giving weather-forecasting more credit than it’s worth. Anything more than three days is losing reliability with 5 days the practical limit.

The more detail wanted or tried for, the shorter the reliability frame. For long term (up to three months or so), forecasting is very general. Piers Corban is about the most accurate. His accuracy was measured once (can’t remember who by but an ISE (Internet Search Engine) may find it) as at least c. 27% out to three months, which is better than pure chance. That’s pretty good considering the UKMet Office’s Greenhouse (Gas) Model which, while not a total failure at a mere 15%, is significantly less than pure chance. (How much did their latest super computer cost?)

He has started offering Aus/NZ long term forecasts, now. Might be worth taking a look …

Andy
That’s a black bear. Nothing new there, Tiglath Pilester, the tame black bear of Frank Buckland when at Oxford Uni in the roughly 1845-50 was ‘sent down’ for repeated raids on the confectionery shop.

One might ask, what rising temperatures? But of course, that’s not allowed anymore so I won’t ask. I’ll just say, “One might ask, what rising Temperatures?” That should keep me clear of the climate change branch of the PC police.

Besides another CAGW own goal, at this time of year they should be focussing all their killjoy moroseness on Easter Eggs and in particular the foil wrapping.

Made from billet aluminium, rolled with heavy metal machinery and beta rays, kerosene based lubricants used during rolling, annealing or heat treatment used to burn off lubricant, and then factoring in the energy used for production mostly derived from fossil fuels.

“Quelle Horreur !”

The true believers should take heed of this devastating information before creating their tin-foil hats to block out evil denialist facts.

But somehow Papier-mâché vegan friendly hat just doesn’t have the same panache even though its protective properties is ample enough for the contents being protected.

“Jag is claiming 0-to-62-mph times of 3.4 seconds for the 3000-pound C-X75, about as quick as a Ferrari 458 Italia, with the quarter-mile accomplished in 10.3 seconds at 156 mph. Under hard acceleration, its runs solely on electricity to 60 mph, then one turbine kicks in to assist up to 120 mph. Beyond that, both turbines assist the C-X75 to its top speed. ”

I have always been interested in Guy Callendar’s change of mind. He wrote the original Climate Warming paper due to CO2 in 1938 for the Royal Society but after the freezing winter in 1962 (worse than in 1947) in the UK he changed his mind. Perhaps that’s why he doesn’t get mentioned by the trolls (along with James Lovelock who also seems to have changed his mind on the effect of CO2).

Of course they don’t want to bring up the question of whether Northern Hemisphere temperatures have actually risen at all since 1938.

Yes you are right about James Lovelock.
He was the bloke I read in the 1980′s predicting global warming
And wanting all of us to switch to nuclear power..
And for that he was banned & shunned by all the Greenists.

At least Lovelock had the honesty to admit that expensive unreliable ‘renewable’
Energy would be a disaster.
In that he was right.

Why are the media and their fellow travelers still saying that Australia contributes 1.3% of world emissions?

That was the figure quoted in 2011. With China alone, increasing theirs by more than Australia in one year and not including the rest of the world’s increases, I doubt that Australia’s contribution would exceed 1%. In fact, a quick estimation would come closer to 0.6%.

I might also point out that Australian annual carbon sinking has increased by at least 2GT per annum since Kyoto. Since our emission is 550MT we are emitting -1.5GT (absorbing China’s emission) I’m still waiting on my cheque from president Xi

Am I? Robert “using child labour for chocolate growing is reprehensible but using child labour to mine Cobolt for electric cars is to be applauded!”

Now how would you interpret that. I had already said “of course is that more inefficient, child labour intensive, forest destroying farms have been established to support obesity in the west” Which makes my point clear. Can you see the breakdown in logic there?

Andy are you saying that those young western child protesters are doing it so they can survive, are you saying that those western children forgo other alternatives like education? It is a false equivalence.

Ok been busy and internet is under one download and about two for upload most of the time so have to wait for it to speed up before I can use it .
Now Putz you rightly were against child labour for chocolate growing yet you freely support the push to EV’s , solar and wind power and aren’t those batteries just the best thing since sliced bread hey ?
Never once have I seen a post from you criticising any of the above for the use of child mined cobalt.
Which means you’re a hypocrite but that’s nothing new really .

“[Global warming] and increased land use for food crops will negatively affect the cocoa output in the long run.”

Of course it will. Only on planet Itsacon.

Meanwhile … on planet Earth:

Origin of chocolate shifts 1,400 miles and 1,500 years

Cacao was in use in South America centuries before its exploitation by civilisations in Mexico and Central America, experts say.

“It is used by people in this area more than 5,000 years ago – way earlier than we have ever found in Mesoamerica and Central America,” said Prof Michael Blake, a co-author of the research from the University of British Columbia in Canada.

Writing in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution, Blake and colleagues describe how they made the discovery at a site in the highlands of Ecuador called Santa Ana-La Florida.

Thought to have been lived in between about 5,500 and 3,300 years ago, the site caused a stir when discovered in 2002 because it revealed a previously unknown ancient society now called the Mayo Chinchipe culture.

As long as other nutrients are not limiting (lack of water, for example), CO2 increases will be mirrored in plant production. But as the link shows the explanation for the increase in cocoa production is more acreage planted with cocoa plants. Second point is that CO2 has increased by about 80-100 ppm of a base of 280-300 ppm, or about a 1/4. Cocoa production has doubled in that time, but according to NSW Forestry Corporation we have not seen similar production increases in their plantations, so CO2 is only a minor player.

If the so called hiatus continues for another decade its categorised as climate change and we are stuck on a relatively high plateau in this modern climate optimum. As the world is at the end of the Holocene its unlikely that we’ll return to RWP and MWP levels

Roy Spencer seems to be saying that at some point the system will find equilibrium.

If C3 plants are to benefit from a global rise in CO2 then you should expect to see similar production increases world wide. NSW Forestry does not show this, and these are forests managed without extra additives like fertiliser. Does that make it clear?

Your first point, how can you know that those yield increases are not due to fertiliser, and/or elevated temperature and/or better varieties and/or better management. On your second point, a plantation is a crop.

Peter, what caused the increase in crops? All of the above. It shows that increasing CO2 has done no harm and probably caused a boom. Why do you think market gardeners pump in CO2 pollution to greenhouses — probably because it isn’t pollution and it increases crop yield by 30 -40%.

Leave pollution value of CO2 aside for the moment. All those references from CO2 Science remove any limiting factors (like water, trace elements etc). So although the CO2 is a growth enhancer, it can only do so when fertilisers, etc are optimised – which is why I referenced the production of plantation forests where they do not have increased growth rates.

Now back to the CO2 pollution question. At levels over 1000 PPM, studies show that participants complain of headaches, and the deleterious effects get worse as the level increases. Of course we are not there yet. However, as the level of CO2 increases it will have a differential effect on the species mix which currently makes up our biome. As an example, at 800 PPM tree ferns are particularly advantaged, which was good for the production of peat and eventually coal, but less good for roses (for example).

Lastly the libertarian argument, if you want to add CO2 into my air, then you should pay me for it, as dumping it into the air is a benefit to you, but not to me. The market gardeners must have already set a price for CO2, so it can be traded

So pFitz wants fertilizers “optimized?” The optimum level for atmospheric CO2 (a plant fertilizer!) seems to be c. 1000ppmv (800ppmv – 1200ppmv.) That’s what all our food plants evolved for and seem to do best at.

Scott Adams in his “Trump Solves Climate Change” video is maintaining that using the new cheap nuclear power that is becoming available it is feasible inexpensively to extract and overall reduce carbon dioxide from the atmosphere should its level become problematic; somebody needs to give him a quick primer on chemical equilibrium and the impossibility of exhausting the carbon dioxide content of the oceans. At 8’13″/30’54″ I switched it off life being too short to hear out his ignorant rigmarole.

14 Apr: Tasmania Examiner: Tasmanian grape growers predict record harvest in 2019 after ideal conditions and further expansion of vineyards in Tamar Valley
by Adam Holmes
Wine growing in the Tamar Valley has never been better, she says, assisted by strong spring rainfall followed by a warm dry summer and autumn providing ideal conditions for fruit to ripen for the 2019 vintage…

14 Apr: Forbes: Record Global Wine Harvest In 2018, Stable Consumption
by Per and Britt Karlsson
Wine production reached a record volume of 293 million hectolitres globally, recovering from a very small production in 2017. Europe is still by far the dominant producer with close to 70% of the total. The leading countries are Italy, France, Spain and the USA. The global vineyard surface area did not change with Spain having the biggest plantings, followed by China and France…
This is the biggest wine harvest in 15 years, since 2004/2005…

Manufacturing sector sheds 18000 jobs under Palaszczuk Government
Courier Mail – 20 Apr 2019
MORE than 18000 manufacturing jobs have been wiped out under the Palaszczuk Government with the sector now employing its lowest number of workers since 1990s recession…
“Our comparative advantage is being able to dig stuff out of the ground and grow stuff out of the ground,” he said…

5. If the activists attach themselves to something, build a secure safety fence around them and leave them there.

They could sustainably sustain themselves on the weeds and grasses that grow where they are standing, and any insects that happen to pass by. It is, after all, what most are suggesting the rest of us do…

Good article in icecap.us April 19th titled Climate Change And the 10 warning signs of a cult
The Climate Change believers meet all 10 ctiteria

This is no longer about science
It’s all about politics
The UN is setting itself up as a non elected world government to impose their view upon the world
It all about power,control and greed.
Climate pseudo science is just a vehicle for them to claim some crediy to support their world takeover

The propganda Through the mass media has fallen in line

This blog site likes to challenge the “science”
It’s pointless when dealing with cults.

most of the locals weren’t happy with their new green and expensive electricity supply .

Those installing solar panels will be even less happy. Heat waves are, as alleged and broadcast by the greens, supposed to become more common. Solar panels aren’t at all efficient over 40° C and their inverters and other electronic equipment stop functioning about those temperatures too.

According to Dr Joel H Glass, in this op-ed the new(er) panels ex China are unrecyclable. Ok. He points out that countries turning to solar panels which have an absolute life-time of about 25 years will have to build new mountain ranges as Germany had to do during the rebuilding of their destroyed cities after WW2.

He points out that wind turbines have similar temperature problems, around 40°C and, if the greenies are right and we get more and stronger winds, wind velocity problems. Shredding their blades could be dangerous!

10 Apr: CarbonBrief: Analysis: Why children must emit eight times less CO2 than their grandparents
by Zeke Hausfather
The idea for this analysis was first proposed to Carbon Brief by Dr Ben Caldecott at the University of Oxford. The methodology used – and its limitations – are explained in detail at the end of this article. Carbon Brief is now working to further develop the analysis with Dr Caldecott and his colleagues…https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-why-children-must-emit-eight-times-less-co2-than-their-grandparents

re the Forbes’ writer: Erik Kobayashi-Solomon is the founder of IOI Capital, the manager of a private investment partnership dedicated to investing in public and private companies focusing on ways to help civilization mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change. My expertise in valuing private and publicly-traded companies has been sought out by top institutions, including the World Bank, and I have appeared on national TV programs such as The Nightly Business Report and in the international media. In 2014, I published The Intelligent Option Investor: Applying Value Investing to the World of Options…

Just a reminder that this End-of-the-Twirl™, Cocoapalypse Now, climate chocolate shortage story seems to re-occur nearly every year. You had a story on this back in 2015 and I also commented on it when it was in the news back in 2014.